Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on? (Read 6728 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on?

As my two other posts in this forum indicate I've been tackling problems with FLAC playability on my network head-on lately.  In the course of trying various diagnostics, players, plug-ins, etc., I've come to the conclusion that there are more versions of the FLAC_in.dll file floating around that ANYONE knows what to do with.

The latest FLAC installer (windows) from flac.sourceforge\download is 1.0beta7.  However, I've also been confronted with 1.0beta6, 1.0beta4, 1.0beta3, 1.1.0, etc.  In fact, the last one (1.1.0) is in the CVS release (3.16.04) and other spots on the net, but isn't in the latest installer version of Flac front-end.  However, this is probably a good thing since the 1.1.0 release is actually screwed up and doesn't work properly; it misreads and misinterprets file metadata, displaying no information for certain fields (artist), the wrong information (artists for album) in others, etc.

I'm not sure this is the right place to say this, but I've read posts by some hardcore Flac folks here and figure there are regulars associated with the project.  So, could someone involved in the project take the inititive to sort all this crap out?  I love the idea and nature of Flac, but as it stands just installing a stupid plug0in is a DAUNTING undertaking.  The website isn't clear at all on where the plug-ins can be found (the latest version is in the installer, but it isn't clear how the installer works or that it will install the plug-in if you have winamp, etc.). Basically the site is designed for people who already know WTH their doing, and while I;m technically agile I know other people just look at that download page, shrug, and throw up their hands in amazement.

What I'd like to see is a break down of the software you can get with DESCRIPTIONS of what it has, what it does, etc.  Maybe make it easier for people to link to download directories to insure they have the latest version (instead of hosting old versions locally), kill or just relink the plug-ins from the Winamp plug-ins database (the winamp 5 working version isn't even listed from what I can see), and just generally make FLAC more friendly from a usability perspective.  Right now it seems like all the resources and data is oriented towards techno-audiophiles or developers who work on teh project, not end users who are far less familiar with versioning and think CVS is just a place to get a prescription filled.

The more people that adopt and use Flac the more products that get made that support Flac, and teh more products that support Flac the happier all of us who use it for jukebox archives will be.  Please don't resign me to a world of lossless WMA and AAC, I'll have to go on a berzerker barage.

-rt

Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on?

Reply #1 –
normally the installer from http://mikewren.com/flac/ helps a lot, because there are most of the *working* plugins and flac-tools packed in one installable file.

on the other side, you are right: FLAC the format is perfect, but with the Winamp-plugin I have some problems myself:
The transfer of tags from the Winamp-plugin to Winamp does not work properly (only if you use the latest plugin AND add ID3-Tags to the FLAC-files, too). I was also mentioning this here on the forum before...

hope, I could help a bit

Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on?

Reply #2 –
If anyone has any suggestions for additional FLAC plugins for that installer, just say the word. 

Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on?

Reply #3 –
Did you build the installer?  I like the inclusion of plug-ins in the installer, it's an easy way to quickly install plug-ins for teh players that support the codec.  I also like the fact that the plug-in in the installer (for Winamp) actually works, or at least works better than any of the other plug-ins I found.

I don't remember what I saw in the installer, but you might include the QCD plug-in, Apollo plug-in, and any other plug-ins for players that support FLAC (I think that may be the full list tho  ).

As I stated previously, it should just be clearer what all the stuff on teh FLAC site DOES.  Right now its MADDENINGLY confusing to use teh site, download the files, and just get a player up and running that can actually PLAY FLAC files.  A noob should be able to go to the flac site, find an introduction to FLAC and figure out what to download to play it inside 5 minutes.

-rt

Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on?

Reply #4 –
Maybe WMA lossless is more suited to you then, they have a staff of paid fulltime webmasters to keep their homepage look less confusing. Plus they are not confusing newbies with evil beta versions.

If I was Josh I would have stopped reading your post after you threw around attention-whore buzzwords like "crap" "stupid" and "daunting", preferrably in capital letters.
Sadly this behavior has become a popular trend in public forums lately. There should also be a filter for threads that start with "So,..", "Um,..." or "Well,..."

Have a nice day

Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on?

Reply #5 –
Ah, yeah, I forgot how long it takes to edit the HTML of a web page.  DAMN, its a real effort, eh?  I mean you might have to spend like 20 minutes inputing some descriptions that actually tell users what a file does.  And creating a link!  I might have to roll out the Cray supercomputer for tha project... what do yoiu figure, 25 hours to compile the link?

You may be happy with a complicated site that is newb-unfriendly, driving away all but technically agile users and keeping the community limited to a bunch of "cliche" folks like yourself.  However, I am not.  I have read NUMEROUS posts from people on all sorts of boards (including this one) indicating confusion and problems about why you would want to install the Flac executable, what the hell it does, where the plug-ins actually are, what plug-in is the most recent, etc. to know that this is a problem that is not limited to just the inordinately lazy and stupid.

Since I can only presume from your post that you haven't worked on many dev projects that made the transtion to "published product," let me take a quick moment to clarify some important ideas.  At some point any successful codec, program, OS, or whatever goes mainstream.  To make that leap the system and the components thats support it have to be accessible to the poeple that compose the mainstream audience, otherwise adoption is impossible.

Just as an example of what I'm talking about, ever wonder why linux isn't more widespread?  While lots of OS folks love to point at MS, its actually because the developers and community who support it don't have a vested interest in seeing it publicly adopted, so they don't create and support the mechanisms needed to DRIVE that adoption, and so the identity users perceive of a fragmented and complex alternative are maintained and reinforced.  The Linux community like the command line, they like all sorts of little components and isolated development thread, and they like keeping things technically oriented, sacrificing the adoptability of the product in the process.  This is fine if you're happy with this kind of community and product, but to complain about why it isn't more widely used and adopted is then laughable.  The same holds true for FLAC; if you want more compatible software and you want more hardware support the trade off is making everything friendly so you create a community that DEMANDS products support FLAC.

And as for your WMA comments, the fact that I would like the site and maintenance of FLAC to be a little more user-friendly does not by any stretch translate into "me no like FLAC you all stupid heads" as you would seem to presume.  I chose FLAC for my archive because it provides clear advantages in terms of decoding, streaming, open-source, etc.  I went to the trouble of actually analyzing the options that exist and selecting FLAC for my lossless option.  Excuse me if I'd like to actually improve on what I see as weaknesses and push public adoption and interest that would further a codec I support.

-rt

Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on?

Reply #6 –
I have to agree with rtilghman here.

Some of my favorite open source projects:
  Eclipse
  TortoiseCVS
  Hibernate
  Firefox
  Thunderbird

They have all taken considerable effort to not only have technical excellence, but to be accessible to users.  Eclipse and TCVS take this further by not only being high quality, accessible projects, but also having better release scheduling/cycles than 99% of commercial products.

These are all extremely successful projects that continue to grow and thrive.  I don't believe it's coincidence.

Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on?

Reply #7 –
BTW, I'd happily do a quick and dirty rearchitect/rebuild of the FLAC website if the problem is a lack of free time and resources.  I'm a practicing IA with a background in engineering, so it would be a nice side-project that would allow me to lend my services to my favorite codec.

Just don't want to seem like some whiner looking for someone else to put in the effort here.

-rt

Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on?

Reply #8 –
That sort of attitude will get you nowhere mister.

Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on?

Reply #9 –
Not always development of libraries, codecs, commandline progs, GUI's and plugs synchronized will be....

Much sadness will bring.... 

(might the force (qi) with you be....)
"ONLY THOSE WHO ATTEMPT THE IMPOSSIBLE WILL ACHIEVE THE ABSURD"
        - Oceania Association of Autonomous Astronauts

Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on?

Reply #10 –
Emetts opinions and methods may have been, well, strange sometimes, but since he's gone there is definitely an organisation vacuum within Xiph ( let me quickly add IMO ).

Playing devil's advocat : what benefit did Josh get from joining Xiph lately ? Xiph do have a great lossless codec in their portfolio now, but what does Josh get back from them ?

The biggest help a codec developer like Josh needs to get is implementation and compilation help for all the various players and platforms out there, so he can concentrate on the main thing, the codec. By no means should a dev like him have to invest time updating a webpage, there MUST be other team members doing this for him.

Of course, as a company with investors behind you, you think twice before bringing in a new team member who will care about the website and stuff ..... he might ask himself after some time why he actually is working for you, helping you to achieve break even one day, and for nothing ? Real opensource projects, like FFMPEG, Videolan and mplayer, will never have problems here. The number of volunteers offering help with such simple things as website creation and maintaining is probably more than they could ever handle .....

Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on?

Reply #11 –
Quote
BTW, I'd happily do a quick and dirty rearchitect/rebuild of the FLAC website if the problem is a lack of free time and resources.  I'm a practicing IA with a background in engineering, so it would be a nice side-project that would allow me to lend my services to my favorite codec.

I'm not ready for a redesign but if you can come up with some verbiage that is more user-friendly that would be great.

I'm probably not so in touch with new users but it is also harder than it sounds to satisfy even a majority of people coming to a site, especially for a codec which is not much like an end application that people are more used to dealing with.

Josh

Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on?

Reply #12 –
I'll take a look over what's there tonight, see what I can come up with, and send it along when I'm done.  Hopefully it will help out.

best,
rt

Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on?

Reply #13 –
Quote
I'm probably not so in touch with new users but it is also harder than it sounds to satisfy even a majority of people coming to a site

I can definitely testify to this.  I have no experience as far as websites go, but I'd say the same thing is true for developers documenting their software.  When I give a release of mine to the development management / sales guys, they always come back with the most unusual requests for information on how to do something or how something works.  Of course... it's only unusual in my eyes.

While I don't think it's absolutely necessary for a non-developer to do the docs/website, it certainly can help matters.

rtilghman, while you're looking over things, i think it would be a good idea to think of things from an end-user perspective.  I'm pretty sure most end-users of flac have one of two goals.. a) playing b) encoding.  Or maybe even both!! 

Starting from these two goals a tree structure could be made

flac
..about - lossless blah not mp3 blah
..playing
....winamp - blah blah plugin blah blah
....foobar - supported natively blah blah
....etc
..encoding
....eac - external encoder blah blah
....from wav - flac blah front end
....etc

That's really all an end-user needs to know, so these things should be front and center.  That said, I really don't think the flac site is all that bad, but having the stuff mentioned above kept easily accesible and in a current state would go a long way.

And all the more detailed stuff should still be available, just behind all the basic stuff instead of on the same level.

Hmm.. I wonder if any of that makes any sense.. it's late.. I'm going to bed.. tschuess.

Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on?

Reply #14 –
Well I'm actually an IA, so thinking about things from the end user's perspective is an inescapable aspect of my day... something that can be annoying at times. 

Off-hand if I had to take a quick stab at a layout for FLAC I'd probably break the user's into three types outright:

- For Beginning Users
- For Advanced User
- For Developers

and build the experience around those profiles.  By and large they are generally mutually exclusive; each shares the need for the core software and tools, but the content that frames it and the experience is different for each.

We'll see what I can come up with for now that stays within the current framework, but its hard to do too much without changing the underlying architecture to facilitate the larger "user experiences".  Desriptions should be a good start though.

-rt

Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on?

Reply #15 –
Just my two Eurocents...

I agree with rtilghman analysis and attitude.

It is a real pitty that so wanderful pieces of code such EAC, F2K, LAME or FLAC just to say some, are confined to an elite community.

All those are technically awesome if comperad with other commercial solutions, but each of them lacks in one or both of two importants things that can make them go mainstream: user interface and documentation.

This is anyway the price you pay when you want to surf the edge of the technology wave. It is also true that at a given point something must be decided about the future of a piece of code: leave it as a niche solution or contribute to the community letting it to go mainstream, with all the hassle this can imply...

Sergio
Sergio
M-Audio Delta AP + Revox B150 + (JBL 4301B | Sennheiser Amperior | Sennheiser HD598)

Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on?

Reply #16 –
Um guys, I'm as newbie as they come.  I got involved in audio only as of mid March this year.  After a bit of scouting around on the web, including this forum, purely as a result of hits on google searches, I settled down to using EAC and Goldwave to rip, FLAC to archive to DVD's w/Cues, and LAME/TAG/FOOBAR2K for prepping songs and listening from harddrive/handheld. 

The assorted sites for all these tools may not have been written with hold your hand clarity, but overall the information was straightfoward enough for me and I would think many others to pop in and make things work.  (Exception - EAC and ASPI).  And the tools themselves are all quite straightfoward, even if batching methods are not.  I might wish a more extensive front end to tag, but that only means I have to dig in for more complex scenarios, not that the Speek front end won't work fine for simple uses. 

Commercial popularity (even if free) has little to do with quality and much to do with advertising and general standards.  Imo, the main reason these sites are not more accessible to entry users is that those who consider them the best tools are busy preaching to the converted (aka here) rather than out posting how wonderful they are to the more populous music discussion sites.  There's no blame attached to that, but popularization generally depends on word of mouth or advertising.  Since most or all of these products are free, advertising isnt going to happen, thus word of mouth becomes crucial.  Only after folks have been convinced to check out a site does its quality or clarity come into play. 

Raederle

Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on?

Reply #17 –
Hmm.  Just to clarify, you are a computer noob?  You have no understanding of anything beyond windows, little understanding of how to use windows, you use IE, have never upgraded your machine or applied patches or updates, you don't know what those little characters on the end of filenames are, you like the "coffee holder tray" that comes out of your desktop?  In short, you are a total computer retard who has little idea what these magic boxes can do?

I'm not trying to be sarcastic or anything, just trying to clarify what we mean when we say "noob."  The VAST majority of recreational computer users have NO idea how to do almost anything with a DAP or digital music.  Example: later this week I have to go by the house of a family friend I helped purchase a DAP (Karma).  He needs help learning how to use the RMM software and how to rip his music to digital from his CDs.  He's a smart guy (Radiologist), but he neither has the time nor the technical abilities to understand ANY of this.  I mean this is a guy who called me to find out how to change the default home page of his web browser!  I can only imagine what he would say if I told him "yah just rip to flac with EAC, trans-encode to OGG, store to DVD-R, and you're good to go dude!"

Point being that while no level of usability improvement or hand-holding will get this guy to start adding his own seek points to flac files, people like him are the majority that drive commercial success.  It doesn't matter if you market the hell out of a product if he can't USE IT, and without at least a requisite level of hand-holding that just isn't going to happen.  Why did AOL succeed so handily for over a decade when everyone who knew anything knew it was a ridiculous, overpriced waste of time?  Because it was SIMPLE and didn't require the user to have ANY knowledge of what he or she was doing to install and use it.  It came on the machine and walked you through the steps to setting everything up, and it never once demanded that you bother learning anything at all; hell, lots of AOL users STILL think AOl IS the web.

I mean seriously, you went to the web, did some research, and came up with ripping using EAC and goldwave, archived to DVD-R (that's already a techie move!), and then had the grasp to trans-encode to a lossy codec for general use and you think you're a newbie?!?  I mean you actually understood WHY you should even transencode!  You are outta touch wirth the masses my man.  You remind me of that kid in Greenwich, CT, who when asked what he thinks the average starter home cosst replies "$850,000 for something small." 

best,
rt

Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on?

Reply #18 –
hi
just joined here, looking for info on FLAC and following the threads.

thanks to moderator for not calling this flame provocation because i am benefitting immensely from the dialog. also, to me it is a sign of  a fine group when potential flames  don't, but evolve instead.

i want to introduce another category for IA, of which i doubt that i am a unique representative. i am hardly a noob in general, i won't go into the details, however when it comes to audio codecs, encoding, etc. i am very much so.  i know how to play mp3's on win media player, i can download binaries, i can burn CD's, just began to learn multisession DVD's, but FLAC was new to me and i am spending the afternoon learning how to play them, store them, just found the term 'ttranscoding' learned about EAC, etc.    so i dont need a lot of hand-holding, but just alittle would speed up  ramp time.
this forum does a lot for me. thanks.

btw, as far as i can tell so far, i would download win amp, get a plug in and play my flac files.  back to the trail.

Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on?

Reply #19 –
If you just want to play back FLAC files that will work fine.  I would actually recommend, however, that you let the FLAC front-end installer install the Winamp plug-in for you; the full windows installer (assuming your on windows) includes both the latest non-buggy winamp 2/5 and winamp 3 plug-ins.

You can download the FLAC front-end here.  Just install it after installing Winamp and it will take care of everything for you.

Best,
rt

Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on?

Reply #20 –
OK, point taken.  I may be very new to audio, but I've been making PC's do what I wanted them to do since '77.  Often with time lost to head/wall banging, but generally successful in the end.  I spent this weekend working with FOO2K learning to cusomize the columns UI (goodbye winamp! thanks neskus for a great starting point) and playing with its masstagger, things less technically inclined friends might have choked on.

On the other hand I do still stand by my advertising or word of mouth required point.  It doesn't matter how pretty or easy the websites and installation of these tools is if no one has ever heard of them or knows to go looking.  And while I do have more general computer expertise than many of my friends, most of what I installed was not more than they could handle. 

Where the difference came in is that I was willing to spend the needed TIME to put all the pieces together, as I actually enjoy learning this stuff, rather than being annoyed at how much there is to learn.  And quite agreed, current state of the art requires a lot of playing around to build the *multiple* tools to go from ripping to archive+use.  No one tool is all that complex (though EAC and FOO2K try hard to be).  But working out the series of tools and actions, and checklists for each stage of the way definitelly is.

Having done that, I've been writing up "how to's" for friends to use as they get to the same interests.  And even then, I'm not really finished, as I wont be satisfied until I finish with not eight but three stages with the middle stage fully automated.  (1) Rip to CDI/sheet, 2) archival flac w/embedded cue plus fully named mp3's for songs, 3) Foo tag everything lots).

So yes, ye standard AOL level user is not going to get far here and in that sense your point is well taken,  rt.  On the other hand, without attracting them and their annoyed "gee this is too hard" feedback to the sites/tools in question, their understanding of things they'll never see becomes moot.  Unfortunately this may be leading up requiring someone to fully document each tool and then publish for the masses.  OUCH!  Shutting up now before I get myself drafted into that project by preaching too loud.

Regards,
  Raederle

PS - Sam I used winamp with flacs because I really liked its media library.  Having gotten ahold of the Columns UI with foobar2k and spent the weekend tweaking it I find it does everything winamp did (except radio where imo real is better anyway) while using less resources and blowing up lots less with a large playlist.  I'm not advocating an instant swap, but I would heartily suggest you give Foo a try, it does quite well with Flac.

Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on?

Reply #21 –
My post came off a bit combative, didn't really mean for it to sound that way.  All good points in your post.

And you are correct, while usability and "accessibility" are curcial (IMHO) to product success, marketing/advertising/product awareness plays a POWERFUL role.  The old Beta vs. VHS battle always provides a great example of that point.  Both were more or less equally usable and accessible, the VHS folks just had the sense to push ubiquity and adoption on the public.

The sad truth is that most people are simple sheep who really don't care to understand anything about the products and services they use.  They simply want them to work with the least amount of possible input and effort, and they are more than willing to sacrifice quality in the process.

In this I would argue that anyone who even posts to HA is the exception to teh rule of a disposable consumer culture.  Everybody happy now? *shakes fist at stupid lazy people who come to complete stop at end of on ramp*

I am Darl, the world is mad.

-rt
 

Crazy State of FLAC Plug-ins, WTF is going on?

Reply #22 –
that's  a lot to absorb. i look forward to doing that this weekend. thanks.